Would applying duck tape to my sash windows actually stop any ‘dirtiness’from a dirty bomb entering my drafty house – or would marching against thewar be more effective? No contest! Off I went along with millions across theworld in what was a scream of indignation at being propelled into warwithout the case having been truly made.

My older daughter came with me: she who rarely moves unless strictlynecessary wanted to come. And I was thrilled. I hate the meekness ofnon-expression and indeed I was first politicised by marching against MaggieThatcher and strumming a guitar singing the anti-war songs of the Vietnamyears in folk music venues that, if named, would probably stir old memories.Rites of passage. For so many on the march, it was the first time they hadever done such a thing. Thus is politicisation.

On the crowded tube from Highgate up to Waterloo, where Liberal Democratswere congregating at the Royal Festival Hall to meet Charles Kennedy andthen join the main march, there were a great fusion of different protesters.All sorts from ageing hippies to well dressed middle class ladies, babiesagainst the war, mothers and daughters, fathers and sons, politicalactivists, Muslims and Jews and left-wing extremists. All humanity wasthere.

It would have made it even better would have been alongside the ‘Stop theWar’ banners’, the ‘Not In My Name’ banners, the ‘Make Tea not War’ banners(one wonders what Donald Rumsfeld would make of those!) – would have been ifthe ‘Free Palestine’ banners had also included a ‘Safe Israel’ slogan aswell.

It seemed incongruous that, on a march against war, some people were callingfor only part of a solution to the issue that underpins so much violence andtrouble in the Middle East and elsewhere.

Although we moved briskly at the start of the march, within half an hour wehad ground to a virtual halt. It became clear that our contingent, includingCharles Kennedy, was never going to reach Hyde Park – let alone in time forthe speeches. Charles was whipped off of the march and spirited away tospeak in Hyde Park. Myself, Andy Kershaw, my daughter and several otherssiphoned off into the tube to try and make it in time.

Three of us made to Bond Street and then whipped along Oxford Street amongstpeople who had braved the West End against all advice and were trying tohave a normal afternoon shopping. We made it to the rally, unlike hundredsof thousands of others. But we had missed the main speakers. After six hourswe made it home to see the TV coverage and to see what message would beplayed out around the world. How very bizarre, even when you are at an eventyourself, to have to go home and watch it on TV to see what happened!

Ken Livingstone blasted George Bush in the most uncompromising way I haveever heard a politician so do – and rightly so. Charles Kennedy spoke out, Ifelt, for a large swathe of us who feel uncomfortable with the Government’scase, who don’t believe we should go to war without the sanction of theUnited Nations and who feel damaged by the Labour Government’s treatment ofus with fake ‘evidence’ and a ‘I’m Tony, trust me’ approach to headlong war.

There were many different reasons for people to march. There were manydifferent messages that people wanted to send. But the message I hopesurfaces above all others is that on a single day in February 2003, sixmillion people around the world got angry enough to stand up and shout – notin my name!

Poor old London. We are embattled – be it ricin in Wood Green, war with Iraq, war with the Government or war with the Mayor’s budget!

Let’s start with Gordon Brown. His overall political strategy is clear – sit quietly in the background when there’s a controversy, let Tony take the public flack and hope this helps achieve his real aim – to succeed Tony in Number 10 sooner rather than latter. So it’s no great surprise that Gordon Brown hasn’t come out with a clear view on a London Olympics bid.

What he has done though – even this early in year – is in the running for the cheekiest political suggestion of the year. Gordon, who resolutely refused to allow the Mayor of London to borrow money to improve the tube – and has insisted on privatisation instead – now says, “London can have the Olympics, but the Mayor must borrow the money to pay for it.”

I guess we should be glad he’s not insisting on a PFI-backed bid for the Olympics. I can just imagine it – the 100 metres final cancelled due to leaves on the track, hurdles races called off because the contractors forgot to supply any hurdles and the length of the marathon course being wrongly measured.

On the tube, just about every transport expert pointed out how Gordon’s privatisation plans were far more expensive than the alternative – letting the Mayor issue bonds to raise the funds for improving the tube. What’s sauce for the Olympic goose clearly isn’t sauce for the tube gander. (A convoluted metaphor – but you get my drift).

Add to that minister Tessa Jowell’s sanctimonious cry that the government doesn’t want to take away money for hospitals and schools – well, it never bothers them when a war is in the offing. Imagine the spectacle – the Secretary of State for Defence getting up and saying that the government doesn’t have the money to pay for a (UN backed) attack on Iraq, so in a bid to save costs it’s going to put it out to tender to Jarvis or Capita.

And quite frankly, that isn’t the equation – the Olympics would regenerate great swathes of east London. CrossRail would get built faster and London would be the winner. Therein lies the problem. This government isn’t that bothered about London and certainly doesn’t want the Mayor to have any perceived feathers in his cap. Combine this with the government’s debacles over the Dome, the World Athletic Championships and Wembley and you can see a deadly combination of self-doubt and the desire to keep London down.

The truth is that, as one of the richest countries in the world – if we really want to do something, the money can be found for it. Having seen the report on the feasibility and planning of the Olympics – financial costs, benefits and physical planning – I have no doubt that if the government backed this wholeheartedly and joined the Assembly and Ken and Londoners – of whom the vast majority want us to go for it – we could really benefit in the way that Sydney did.

But on both the Olympics – and Iraq – the views of the majority don’t seem to matter to Labour. The idea that we should not go to war unless there is proper United Nations backing is so straightforward – yet government ministers are continuing wriggling, trying to sound like they back the UN but refusing to rule out backing the US even if it goes to war unilaterally.

And whilst my military strategic knowledge is limited, I do know that you’re not meant to open up a war on two fronts, let alone three – but sadly for London the third front is looming in the form of the Mayor’s budget – the first debated round of which will be in the public arena by the time you read this. The Mayor will be asking for a huge percentage increase on his last year’s budget which will be added (barring our efforts to bring it down) to the precept to fund his plans for London. And whilst London needs more police on the streets and vastly better public transport – it also needs a Mayor who will stop just taking and start delivering!

I blame it on my children! I wouldn’t have watched Fame Academy if they hadn’t insisted. Well, that’s my story and I’m sticking to it.

Alternatively – you can blame it on the weather. You can blame it on bad luck. Or you can blame it on politicians – unless you are a politician – in which case you can blame it on the media. If you are Ken, you can blame it on Gordon. If you are Tony you can blame it on Ken. If you are Cherie, you can blame it on naivety and, as this is my Christmas column, you can blame this on me – but I do like a bit of philosophical meandering at this time of year.

And my point is – we need to take responsibility for what we do and not try to avoid the blame if it’s due. Then at least we could all make real judgements based on fact.

Just think how refreshing it would be if Gordon Brown did a public broadcast to Londoners explaining that the Government were going to impose PPP (part-privatisation) because, although it wasn’t a good financial deal and it wouldn’t improve conditions in terms of overcrowding on the tube, his problem as Chancellor is that if it doesn’t go ahead, the whole of the Government’s funding of public projects strategy would be in tatters.

Imagine how good it would be if Tony Blair in his TV explanation over the Formula 1 boss Bernie Ecclestone affair had said – ‘actually, you can’t always trust me – the Labour Party needed the £1million from Bernie Ecclestone and so I suppose it did influence my policy and I’m sorry. I made a mistake and even sorrier I now have to give the money back.’ And wouldn’t it be superb if Ken had admitted that he should have come out against the strikes in London, but because some of the funding and support for his Mayoral campaign came from the unions it made it very difficult for him to do so?

Even more seriously, in the New Year, Lord Laming will report his findings on the Victoria Climbie tragedy. To date, not a single politician has taken responsibility for what happened and resigned and I doubt that they will even when the report is published. But they should. For those who bear political responsibility there should be consequences. Virtually everyone who worked in the Social Services department has gone – both management and social workers – but not a single one of the politicians who were responsible for the department and the Council’s running of it.

It reminds me of Ambrose Bierce’s whimsical definition of responsibility – "a detachable burden easily shifted to the shoulders of God, Fate, Fortune, Luck or one’s neighbour. In the days of astrology it was customary to unload it on a star."

Well – the world cannot be put to rights when there are so many wrongs marching on. So as ever, my New Year’s Resolution will be to strive to be a better person (as well as taking more exercise , losing weight and being nicer to my children).

And in the spirit of taking responsibility – to my family I totally take the blame for the fact we have no turkey for Christmas and now won’t have one from my local butcher. It is entirely my fault, because when I rushed in there last Friday I found the deadline for ordering had passed three days earlier and I’m sorry!

And as for Fame Academy, I blame David for giving such a stunning performance on the night that he beat my favourite – Sinead. Happy Christmas and a peaceful 2003!

My journey home from City Hall last week was a disaster. The Tube drivers’ decision to withdraw their labour from a number of Tube lines – including the Northern Line – out of concerns over public safety during the fire strike (nothing to do with sympathy for the strike or secondary picketing of course) meant London Bridge was horribly crowded. So I decided to go south on the Northern line in order to get out of the crush and go far enough to get a seat to then come back in the other direction home to Highgate.

My cunning plan worked – and I did indeed get a seat and avoid the crush – and I had plenty of time on my journey to ponder the woeful state of London.

This is a time of extreme stress for us Londoners. Travelling around London at present is often a nightmare. Add to this the fire strike – which makes us fearful and anxious. Add to this Tube drivers ‘concerns’ for our safety and withdrawal of labour – making our journeys worse in terms of delay, crushing and safety. Add to this the unspecified threat of a terrorist attack. And add to this the news that broke last Sunday that three people had been arrested for an alleged terrorist plot against the Tube. Add to this the fact that Christmas is coming. Add to this …

And in all this – where is the Mayor?

This isn’t the first time this cry has been heard echoing around our capital in times of trouble. Ken so admired Giuliani and the impressive leadership he showed after September 11th when New York so needed it. Not only are we Londoners not getting that type of leadership, but the Mayor is virtually invisible.

We need a Mayor who will come out and stand up for London against all comers – not one who gives us the sneaky suspicion that he is hiding until it all goes away. And certainly not one whose silence may in some part be due to his having been supported during his election campaign by the unions, or due to their support for his stooge Nicky Gavron as Labour Mayoral candidate to try to stitch up his re-election. Shame on you, Ken.

So then, when I emerged from the Tube, having made this ‘journey horribilous’ – full of thoughts of gloom and despair – I hurried to the local wine shop in Highgate to buy some wine for an informal meeting I was holding later that evening. Having chosen a few bottles and put them on the counter – I discovered I had no purse in my bag. Perfect end to a perfect day – not!

I thought it might have been pick-pocketed in the crush at the stations – and added to that was the thought of having to go home and come all the way back in order to pay. By this time I was definitely verging on the tired and emotional.

I tried to persuade the assistant to take a cheque without bankers card but, good employee that she was, she refused. Then, a gentleman in the shop suddenly stepped into this discussion and offered to pay for my purchases letting me write my cheque to him without guarantee. Thus restoring my faith in human nature and demonstrating that trust and chivalry are not dead. The gloom lifted – and as we all like happy endings – my purse was at home where I had left it!

Occasionally, and when I’m in a benign frame of mind, I ask my children for their opinion on a decision I am making. I try not to make a habit of it – because (despite being a liberal) more often than not, the truth is that I have already made up my mind what we are going to do that day or what I have decided they can wear to a family ‘do’ where trainers would be outré.

However, on those occasions when I do consult my offspring, I do try and deliver the outcome they voice as desirable.

Mayor Livingstone clearly hasn’t got the hang of this yet – that consultation has to have a point. That people, if asked their opinion or asked to vote on a local transport issue, expect the outcome of the consultation to reflect their collective views in some measure.

At the Assembly this week, the Mayor came in for severe criticism (from me and other Assembly members) for taking no notice of the results of his consultations – if they don’t deliver the result he wants.

Two recent examples included a small consultation on the re-routeing of the P13 bus, which goes from Streatham, via Southwark, to Surrey Quays. A huge majority voted in favour of one route – but the Mayor decided to ignore this and route the bus where he wanted it to go all along. When challenged, his explanation boiled down to ‘Cos I say so and I’m the Mayor’.

The other example was on a new tram line through West London where huge swathes of residents didn’t even receive the consultation and where the plans on which they were consulted have since been declared erroneous in content. And yet, the Mayor has used this first consultation to make an initial decision – regardless of the fact it was flawed.

His constant cry is – if you don’t like it, vote me out next time. Not good enough Ken!

I am so sick of consultations that are really public relations exercises for the local council or in this case the Mayor, that I had a real go at him in the Assembly. If the Mayor’s made up his mind to do something, he should say so – not dress it up in a meaningless consultation.

I asked Ken to agree to a ‘Consultation Charter’ which would make clear to those he was consulting exactly what their answers could affect and what was not changeable.

Ken is cavalier and contemptuous on the issue of consultation and if you haven’t yet experienced one of the Mayor’s so-called consultations yourself – just wait until you do. Consultation is important and the constant abuse of the process is devaluing its real value and benefit.

I know from the feedback I get through the post and via my website, http://www.lynnefeatherstone.org, how useful and well-considered the views you get through consultation often are. Those using public services day-to-day often spot things that elected representatives miss – and genuinely listening to them means we can do a better job.

Although Ken banged on for a bit longer about being the Mayor and it being up to him to make decisions, he did agree to work with the Transport Committee of the Assembly on a ‘Consultation Toolkit’. This will hopefully mean in the future that there will be more of a point to the Mayor’s consultations.

That would be a welcome change. After all, if I took Ken’s approach into my own home environment, it would be like asking my kids what they want for dinner when the pizza delivery man was, in reality, already on the way!

Hmmm – it’s a brave man who stands me up at the last minute, I can tell you!

But I guess Bob Kiley is a brave man. He’d have to be to take on the job of Transport Commissioner for London. And stand me up, he did.

I had arranged a fringe meeting at the Liberal Democrat Conference last week. “Who Runs Public Transport?” with Bob, Professor David Begg, Chair of the Commission for Integrated Transport, and myself, as speakers.

However, late on the day, he rang to say ‘something’ had come up. He was hugely apologetic, but wouldn’t be able to make it. My theory is that he was knobbled by the Mayor. Why would Ken want to stop him from coming? Well, I expect it had something to do with not wanting any publicity about transport issues from the Lib Dem Conference unless he, Ken – turning up later in the week himself – was the star.

Livingstone may be a successful politician, but he is also completely ruthless about these kind of issues when his re-election is in the offing.

Anyway, more to the point, was the meeting was fabulous. A huge crowd turned up – and they didn’t leave when it was announced that Kiley wasn’t coming. Transport is such a key issue – and people are really engaged (mostly through anger) in what is happening.

My answer to the fringe title’s question, Who Runs Public Transport?, is not the travelling public. If you get stuck in a hot, crowded Tube train for half and hour, wait an hour at peak time for a bus (and then four come together), get badly treated by a bus driver or are attacked at a suburban railway station because it is poorly lit and unmanned, the chances of the public making headway with a complaint is frequently nil.

The travelling public have no power in this, nor in any serious way do their elected representatives – with the dishonourable exception of Gordon Brown. The Mayor was elected to run London. The Mayor appointed Bob Kiley as Commissioner of Transport. The Commissioner of Transport was hired to run our Tube network. He had a successful plan that was tried and tested in New York, to raise money to improve our Tube.

But no – Gordon Brown, with his control freakery to the fore, wouldn’t dare let someone else decide how to finance and run the Tube. Instead, it had to be Labour’s PPP plan to break-up and privatise the network. PPP is not safe, not cheap and not wanted. Voters have regularly had their say against it in the ballot box, but as long as Labour MPs have trooped through the Parliamentary lobbies in favour of PPP it has grinded on.

There isn’t room in this column to run through all of those who do have power in transport. The Treasury, the unions and the media all have more power than the travelling public.

But there is one more answer to who runs public transport and, at the risk of raising my head above the gender parapet, that answer is “men”.

I simply offer the observation that during my two years as Chair of Transport at the London Assembly, virtually 100% of the witnesses we have seen – those with their hands on the levers of transport power – have been men. And nearly all the witnesses from user groups, passengers and disability organisations, have been women.

So it is no surprise when the straps are too high, there is no space for shopping or pushchairs or that there is so little energy or political will behind good lighting in suburban stations, their car parks and the footpaths that surround them or equipping them with CCTV. Nor is it a surprise that the ‘soft’ measures, like green travel plans, are so low on the list.

Because the boys like the big toys – the Crossrails and that old macho game of who’s got the biggest airport.

So perhaps Bob Kiley is relieved that he didn’t turn up to hear me say this in person. But remember Bob – hell hath no fury like a woman scorned. Having stood me up, I look forward to seeing how you are going to make it up to me!

They say travel broadens the mind! Having just returned from two weeks in Southern Spain, sadly my mind is not the only part of me to have broadened.

That said – three lessons from the Costa del Sol: the euro is a doddle, our Euro-sister country of Spain has a police presence on virtually every street and it’s not a good idea to eat the bread and oil on the table before the meal if you don’t want to broaden parts of your anatomy other than your mind.

To be honest, I don’t think about work very much when I am on holiday. However, in the middle of sun-drenched beaches, fried pesquaderos, roasted pepper salad and plenty of red wine I, along with millions of other Brits, could not fail to notice that the Euro was not the end of the Western World as we know it.

I seem to have managed to spend copious amounts of euros with no problem whatsoever. Combined with the ease of electronic banking – being able to insert my cash card abroad – the euro makes life much simpler, not just for tourists but also for anyone wanting to compare prices.

Is it a coincidence, I wonder, that many of the items cheaper on the continent are sold in Britain by companies opposed to the euro? Perish the thought that opposition to the euro could be used as a cover to carry on ripping off people in British shops!

My friend Jenny was a convert on holiday. She was against the euro, thought Britain does better economically on its own, etc. etc. But after two weeks she changed her tune. Phrases like, “well – it’s just easier, more practical,” “it will be more efficient” and “I suppose it’s inevitable” crept into the conversation.

As for our children – no problem whatsoever spending euros. They won’t blink an eye when our currency changes. So roll on the referendum. The sooner the better.

And as I sat in any number of Tapas bars on any number of streets, I could not fail to notice that on virtually every corner, there was a little police kiosk with a police officer in it, giving advice, directions, information and being what we long for so much in our country – a police presence on the streets.

Always someone there to help, to run to in an emergency and acting as a deterrent to those who would rob, or thieve or hurt. Neatly designed, small little office with desk and communications facilities, policed by friendly and helpful officers.

Moreover, these were not instead of police on the beat or police in cars – they were in addition. Whoever would have believed twenty years ago, that we should envy Spain! But I do. We seem to have become the poor relation of Europe.

Police kiosks are coming here. Two are planned for Haringey crime hotspots. But I would like to see them in the outposts of boroughs where a police presence don’t shine – not just in the areas that are considered crime hotspots. We all want to feel secure. We all need police on our streets. Why can’t we have one in Highgate, where there is no police station or front counter to go along with the extra police on the street we have been promised for next year. Why can’t we have them in every High Street – why are we so far behind our Euro-sisters?

As for the GLA – it seemed to manage without me during August – and I gather from what I have read that it also managed without the Mayor, the Deputy Mayor and the Mayor’s Chief of Staff. The Assembly is writing to complain about this abandonment – quite rightly. However, whilst I didn’t see any police on my journey back from the airport to home, I did notice that London seemed to have survived.

And as for my expanding girth – one hundred sit-ups a day and no more fried pesquaderos for me!

(c) Lynne Featherstone, 2002

As the Queen moved down the line of Assembly Members towards me, meeting and greeting, I hastily asked the member next to me whether she was intending to curtsey. I wasn’t – but was trying to strike the correct balance between politeness and undue deference, as republicans do when faced with the reality of royalty.

And I would certainly never wish to be rude. Apparently, curtsying wasn’t required, so the Queen and I just shook hands. I made an attempt at conversation and asked her if she had enjoyed her recent jubilee visit to Haringey. She smiled, made a polite reply and moved on.

So that was that. She’s very professional. She’d arrived, made her official speech in the chamber, toured the building and met the great and the good of London government in just over an hour. She then exited via the aptly named Queen’s Walk, which runs along the Thames, to watch the fireboats shooting magnificent jets of water 100 feet into the air in patterned formation. A crowd had gathered, the dancers danced away and the Queen departed. City Hall was duly opened.

The Queen and City Hall were sort of the old and the new, really, appropriately symbolic of our democracy and our monarchy and the strange juxtaposition of these two worlds. Absolutely nothing in common – but it kind of works.

Business proper started the next day with the first Mayor’s Question Time in our new and magnificent debating chamber. Sadly the debate wasn’t quite up to its new surroundings. Dwarfed by his new surroundings, even Mayor Ken – sitting at his little desk all alone facing a horseshoe of Assembly Members – looked shrunken.

First question from the Deputy Mayor, Nicky Gavron. It seems to me that Ms Gavron has barely said a word in the chamber over the last two years but today she did. This was strangely co-terminus with her announcement the previous day of her candidacy for Mayor of London.

Her question was around the issue of ‘the poor’ having been left out of the Mayor’s Draft London Plan – the document that will become the blueprint for development in London over the next 15-20 years.

Given that Ms Gavron was the main author of the plan as the Mayor’s adviser on Spatial Development, if ‘the poor’ are excluded from the plan isn’t it Nicky who has excluded them?

I presented a petition from Southwark Liberal Democrats asking for Kennington and Bermondsey tube stations to be rezoned from 2 to 1 – sort of compensation for the congestion charging boundary dividing their communities. It could happen for Mornington Crescent and others too were the Mayor to agree. But he didn’t. He said he would set up a review and look at the whole question of re-zoning in due course.

And now, school’s out for summer. The Assembly is in recess for August. And me, I am off to Spain for a couple of weeks with a friend and her children and my children. See you in the autumn when the fun never stops.

Coming up (yes already) are the selection of candidates for the next elections for the London Assembly and Mayor! Seems only a moment ago we were all just a gleam in some politician’s eye …

It was a bit like school really. Naughty Ken was hauled before an emergency sitting of the Assembly, to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth about what had really gone on at the 40th birthday party of his pregnant partner’s sister.

Excitement mounted. Would Ken be forced to resign? Did he push Robin Hedges? Had Emma smoked a cigarette? Was there a fight? Was the Mayor drunk? Excitement – or what?

Innocence personified – that was Ken’s performance. (Please read the following aloud pinching nose to give imitation of the Mayor’s somewhat nasal delivery).

‘No – I didn’t push him. If anything he assaulted me. I only had three glasses of Sauvignon and then slept for 3 hours because I find parties boring’.

Hmmm – my mind briefly touched on the possibility that Ken might have mistaken the word ‘glass’ for ‘bottle’ as images of Ken at the GLA Christmas party, at which he looked neither bored nor sober, flashed across my memory – but Christmas parties – hey, he’s a fun type of guy!

Ken went on: ‘I’ve been in the public eye for 30 years and no stories of me being drunk or badly behaved have appeared.’ Looks like luck’s run out then, finally.

And so on… I won’t bore you with all the details – particularly the bizarre spat as to whether a wall was 10, 12 or 15 feet high – shame I couldn’t frogmarch all the interested parties off to the said wall, give them a ruler and make them sort out the silliness once and for all!

Ken’s line was that he was innocent and much maligned and it was all a plot by the Evening Standard, which didn’t like him and anyway wanted a fuss to boost its sales.

So what of the Assembly’s performance at the ‘trial’? The Tories who started it, wimped out completely, with only their ex-leader making an effort by asking Ken why he didn’t sue the Evening Standard – which would seem to be the obvious course of action.

Labour were even more feeble with only one contribution from their Leader, Toby Harris, to ask if drugs had been involved. The Greens, as usual, said nothing except to venture that unless the Archbishop of Canterbury had told us that he saw what happened, we shouldn’t really trust anyone else’s version of events.

It was left to the Lib Dems to put the only real questioning to the Mayor- not only why didn’t he sue the Standard, but on whether he had spoken to the police or ambulance men (no he hadn’t), on whether he should subject himself to the National Standards Board (no he shouldn’t), on whether the case should go before the Press Complaints Commission (no it shouldn’t). And on and on. You get the drift. Only the court of public opinion should be his judge according to him.

To me, suing the Standard seemed the obvious course of action open to him to clear his and consequently the Authority’s name – which he said he wasn’t going to do because last time he went to court “it hadn’t worked out that well.”

So I thought I would appeal to his conscience. (I live in hope!). ‘Did he feel that there had been anything in his behaviour which might have brought the GLA into disrepute and did he feel there was anything in his behaviour that he should apologise to London for?’. No – was his answer, what he did regret apparently, was believing his partner had smoked a cigarette.

The media feeding frenzy was satiated for the moment – but as for the truth – well I suspect as ever – it was somewhere in the middle. The whole business has undoubtedly brought the Authority into disrepute – but whether this is the fault of the Mayor or the Evening Standard is as clear as mud.

The issue is really one for the National Standards Board – and taking the bull by the horns, LibDem Leader Graham Tope has subsequently referred the matter to the Board. We wait with baited breath…………

While the Mayor’s away, the Assembly will play!

Whilst Ken Livingstone was away in Moscow checking why they have a tube system that runs beautifully and we don’t, it’s been all change at the London Assembly.

The hot news is that Tories have dumped their leader of the last two years, Bob Neill, and elected in the blue corner Eric Ollerenshaw of Hackney Tories as their guiding light. The Conservatives have been deeply split over whether to participate constructively in the work of the Assembly or whether to sit on the sidelines in opposition to everything. It will be interesting to see how the change in leader affects this.

Other hot news – the Liberal Democrat group has turned down the Mayor’s offer of the deputy mayor post. Our job is to keep an eye on him – and that is better done from an independent position. It would have been nice – but just not practicable.

Meanwhile, myself (Chair of Transport Policy) and John Biggs (Chair of Transport Operations, Labour) have avoided pistols at dawn to decide which of us would chair the new single Transport Committee. We have compromised on doing a year each as chair and a year as vice-chair over the next two years.

The reason for the change in transport committees is that the Assembly has reorganised and restructured – yet again! The changes are designed to make us work more like the Parliamentary Select Committees, with standing committees on all the key areas: health, public services, environment, transport, economic development and so on.

The Assembly’s AGM last week ratified these changes. The day began strangely when my Ham & High co-columnist and GLA Tory member, Brian Coleman, kissed me (on the cheek) and congratulated me on the Liberal Democrats’ result in the local elections in Haringey.

It was the second biggest gain of LibDem seats in the country, but given that this had resulted in Haringey becoming a Tory free zone, I was surprised by his warmth of his salutations! Perhaps he was just in a very good mood because of his own result in Barnet.

Anyway – there had been an absolute furore of rumours ricocheting around the GLA preceding the meeting – that the Tories might ‘go into opposition’ at the AGM. The idea of ‘opposition’ on a scrutiny body always seemed a bizarre concept, as it was not clear (even to them) whom they planned to oppose. Did they want to oppose the rest of the Assembly? Did they want to oppose the Mayor? Or indeed, did they just want to oppose anything and everything?

As a scrutiny body with no executive power, the only way to deliver for London and work successfully on the Assembly is to produce cross-party recommendations from investigative committees that result in action and improvements. Improvements can be effected either by scrutinising the Mayor’s proposals and policies to improve them or by taking an issue of importance to London and shining a spotlight on it and pointing the way forward.

We never did find out what the Tories meant by opposition as, in the event, this all evaporated into nothing except their change of leader.

So the changes were rung in – and off we go into the third year of our term of office. It sure goes quickly.

I am not usually a great fan of re-structuring and tend to think it’s what people do when they want to distract you from their lack of results. However,in this case I have to say that the Assembly, although hugely overshadowed by Mayor Livingstone, has produced some very good work over the last two years. In fact, I think the Assembly has done its job somewhat better than the Mayor has done his. It’s just such a shame that he has all the executive power and we have none!